Gayton v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 13

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on April 15, 2015. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
ERIC GAYTON
vs.

PLAINTIFF
Civil No. 4:14-cv-04147

CAROLYN COLVIN,
Commissioner, Social Security Administration

DEFENDANT

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On April 13, 2015, Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion to Remand. ECF No. 11.1
Defendant states he has contacted Plaintiff’s counsel, Greg Giles, who does not oppose the motion.
Id. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge to conduct any and all
proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final judgment, and
conducting all post-judgment proceedings. ECF No. 5. Pursuant to this authority, the Court issues
this memorandum opinion and orders the entry of a final judgment in this matter.
Defendant requests a remand so the Commissioner may conduct further administrative
proceedings and further evaluate Plaintiff’s disability status. ECF No. 12. Specifically, Defendant
requests the case be remanded to an ALJ so that the ALJ can determine whether Plaintiff has been
disabled from December 8, 2006, through his date last insured of December 31, 2011; if a closed
period is determined, evaluate whether medical improvement occurred from the date Plaintiff was
found to no longer be disabled (20 C.F.R. § 404.1594(b)(1)); give further consideration to Plaintiff’s
maximum residual functional capacity and provide rationale with specific references to evidence of
record in support of assessed limitations (Social Security Ruling 96-8p); reevaluate the treating and
1

The docket numbers for this case are referenced by the designation “ECF No.” The transcript pages for
this case are referenced by the designation “Tr.”

1

nontreating source opinions pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527 and Social Security
Rulings 96-2p and 96-5p and nonexamining source opinions in accordance with the provisions of
20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(e) and Social Security Ruling 96-6p, and explain the weight given to such
opinion evidence; and if warranted; at step five, obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational
expert regarding the effect of the assessed limitations on the occupational base (Social Security
Ruling 83-14).
This Court finds this motion is well-taken and Defendant’s Unopposed Motion to Remand
(ECF No. 11) should be GRANTED. The Commissioner’s decision is reversed, and this matter is
hereby remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings. In
addition, the undersigned finds the Plaintiff’s Complaint should be and hereby is dismissed without
prejudice. Plaintiff may still, however, file a motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access
to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
A judgment incorporating these findings will be entered pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 52 and 58.
ENTERED this 15th day of April 2015.

/s/ Barry A. Bryant
HON. BARRY A. BRYANT
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2